Chris and group,
Per our discussion, and from some of my discussions with various
people, we want to make a few distinctions about group focus and
technology focus.
dp.org is about evangelizing multiple technologies
(OAuth, openID, APML, microformats, etc), and WRFS is simply a new
developmental protocol.
dp.org's mission has been stated to not
"reinvent" thing, but in some aspects, WRFS is a new technology
(considering how it has an index "wNode", and the mechanics between
that and the endpoints). From that regard, we decided to announce
draft 1 of the spec here, and then spin WRFS off into its own
development group, since engineering is not the core focus of this
group, and that will help provide a clear distinction between the two
(Which is a complaint ive heard more than once from people).
dp.org
and WRFS will continue to be "best buds", but WRFS has to take its
place in the "stack" and be a solid engineering effort and stand on
its own two feet. This is in no way a slight of any group, or a
"divorce" of anyone, just a clear distinction to make WRFS what it is
(nice, solid, engineering effort), and
dp.org what it is (nice
organizational effort and evangelization).
This way people who want to work on, well, whatever they want, can
continue to do just that, and focus on that. WRFS will continue to
plug right into and be apart of the DP Blueprint, however, to give the
best quality project we felt like it needed to be branded as its own
logical unit.
Thanks for everyone's interest, and we look forward to working with
you all. I've created a google group for WRFS spec work at:
http://groups.google.com/group/wrfs
we'll continue working there once a spec is made public.
Josh